Thanks so much for all the new knowledge! This will prove a valuable refere=
nce as I get deeper.
One thing that seems important to master for now, esp when using the built-=
in mics, is removing microphone hiss with Audacity. Do you recommend this m=
ethod?:
http://www.deeplysimple.net/2006/10/removing-hiss-with-audacity.html
Thanks again!
--- In "Avocet" <> wrote:
>
> Rich,
>
> Overall, my advice is to get a starter budget system like the Sony and
> a mid range affordable mic. If you catch the recording bug, your next
> upgrade could be a low noise mixer which will get over the input
> noise, and start trying out various mic rigs which we talk about on
> this list. I use a professional SQN mixer with a Tascam DR-1 or DR-100
> which gives high quality recordings with no audible hiss on line in.
> Without the mixer, they are both a bit hissy.
>
> I'll go along with those who advise that input noise is not the most
> important factor with budget systems. The important thing is to get
> going and learn as you record. Save your money for a good stereo pair
> and an effective windgag.
>
> Re noise specs I'm struggling not to give a geeky answer, but I'll
> try. Manufacturer's noise figures are often very misleading so it is
> difficult to compare specs. Noise has to be measured against a stated
> norm and these norms are mainly what varies when noise figures are
> quoted to the benefit of the manufacturer.
>
> The sound of noise also varies widely but the most disturbing with
> wildlife recording is hiss. If you can recognise the hiss from a mic
> in a very quiet location (or covered by a heap of bedclothes), you are
> doing well. Here comes the snag - you should compare different mics
> with the same recorder which is difficult if you haven't got your
> hands on them. The noise you are looking for is a persistent high
> hiss. With many practical locations there are other hiss noises like
> wind in trees, but you can learn the sound of the fundamental high
> pitched so called "thermal noise" hiss.
>
> BTW I should have said to get a decent pair of headphones so you can
> hear what you are recording.
>
> One spec which is useful with noise is the output level in mv/Pa and
> 10mv/Pa or higher tends to swamp input stage noise more. The pre-amp
> in the mic should beat the pre-amp in the recorder. If the mic is
> hissy by itself this won't necessarily help with the end result but
> the hiss you will hear will be from the mic, not the recorder.
>
> You can reduce recorded hiss without affecting the overall sound using
> Audacity and if you need more details, I do this with some of my quiet
> recordings taken with MKH mics and a professional mixer with very low
> input noise.
>
> A parabola is not a mic, sorry to be pedantic. You put a conventional
> mic into a parabolic dish and you get three benefits. 1) An increase
> in level at birdsong frequencies, mainly the higher kilohertz which
> swamps the various system hiss noises. 2) This effect happens in a
> narrow angle, leaving other directions at a lower level. 3) Sounds
> from behind are baffled off. These effects make the birds sound much
> closer, which is very handy if they are up high trees.
>
> The snags with a parabola are its bulk and it needs a good stand and
> it can blow over easily. It is also basically mono and if you widen
> its imaging areas for stereo you lose its initial benefits.
>
> David
>
> David Brinicombe
> North Devon, UK
> Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - Ambrose Bierce
>
|